F3LIC3 Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 For metal surfaces you should use a metal(lume) or a lume matal material(phong) shader(the lume metal material shader is hidden). There you can controll the blurred reflection. For the light you should use a MR Area light with raytraced shadows. Under Area Light Parameters you can change the size of the light: bigger-->softer shadows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manta Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 Thanx for the tip, the metal shader works alot better, I'm running into some unreasonable render times now though, 2 hrs. and 25 min for this one, and the settings are definitly not high enough... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Hunt Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 Hi I'm back. What size are you rendering to? and what are your setitings? This is what I set up to render while I was away. The only change was that I cranked up the photons and FG samples to 200 and 300. It took 5:30 @ 3000X2250. The only post work was brightening to match the render in Max. Somewhere along the line of playing with my gamma settings I have skrewed something up. JHV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manta Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 Hey Justin, I'm rendering to 800 x 600 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Hunt Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 Something is wrong there. can you send me the file again and I'll have a look? Did you see my last post, I edited adding my last render JHV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manta Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 Hey Justin, sent you the file, I forgot that its set to look for the FG map so you might want to uncheck that before you render it, it seems like it doesn't save all that much time reusing the FG map, maybe its just me ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJLynn Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 I hate to say it but I don't like the lamp material in any of these versions. It's coming out either too bright or kind of dull, and in that last one I think it might be more than 100% reflective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manta Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 I hate to say it but I don't like the lamp material in any of these versions. It's coming out either too bright or kind of dull, and in that last one I think it might be more than 100% reflective. Don't apologize, I was never really crazy about them either, I did like the vray ones better though, the MR ones look funky... I lessend the blurryness of the metal material in this one (its Vray)... I just don't want it to stand out too much... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panos Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 Hi there all. I believe V -ray and also maxwell render produce more acurate images more quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Hunt Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 When you say accurate, what do you mean exactly? If you are refering to light analysis then both MR and Vray are going to give you false information. Even Maxwell wont tell you the truth, even though it's supposidly physically accurate. There is too much user guess work involved to call these accurate. Manata, I have been looking at the file and there are a few things that stood out imediatly. I should have a bit more time later today to go into more detail. JHV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Hunt Posted June 1, 2006 Share Posted June 1, 2006 Sorry for the delay, things have been hectic here Good work on the displacement, I must say that it looks more natural and softer than the Vray version which is too sharp and spikey. the biggest issues were 1) the main omni, the arealight samples were way too high, try 8 instead of 12 2) The refraction on the whiskey glass and other glass elements was glogging the render 3) instead of high FG samples (1400 is too much) rather increase the Photons, think of FG as the secondry bounce engin of Vray. It fills and smooths the gaps that the primary engin leaves. 4) Have you changed the wall material? The noise bump seems exagerated compared to the previous version. The sampling on the wall needs fixing still I have changed the lights to MR area lights. Put a max fall off on the main omni and removed the refraction on the glass. There are a few more things I would change, but no time for that now, sorry I will package up the ammended file and send it back to you soon. JHV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manta Posted June 1, 2006 Share Posted June 1, 2006 Hey Justin, looks really good, I'm not sure about the glass with no refraction though, I'll have to wait till its rendered at higher settings before I'll make my final comment on that, and no, I didn't change the wall bump, I think that will fix itself when rendered in the final, I meant to put glossy reflections on the mirror frame though, thanx for the tips on FG, I'll give it a try... How long did this one take ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Hunt Posted June 1, 2006 Share Posted June 1, 2006 I agree that the glass is wrong without refraction, as to the time it is 1 hr, but I was doing 101 other processor intensive things at the same time so its not a true indication of the render time. As I said I could get this quicker, just looking for that ellusive 25th hr in the day at the moment. Do you have access to max8? I will also send you the previous version, I think that light setup works better than this one. JHV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manta Posted June 1, 2006 Share Posted June 1, 2006 Hey Justin, yes you can send me the max8 file, tell me, how high should I go with my photons and FG for a final image? Oh and feel free to use this image in your portfolio, if you want, you earned it... Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Hunt Posted June 1, 2006 Share Posted June 1, 2006 You got mail. I found that with the Max 8 I could use much lower settings than Max7. The settings in the Max8 file I have sent should be good for low res, maybe up both photons and FG up to 100 for the final Thanks for the offer, I might just take you up on it. Its been a good exercise and fun to do. If there's any other help needed feel free to ask JHV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manta Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 Hey Justin, Cool... It was nice workin with ya... Oh never got an e-mail, what address did you use ? Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Hunt Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 Just did a reply to your last one, the yahoo address email me and I will reply to that one JHV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Hunt Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 Manta, you got mail Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now